



V ,1 


r ^ ^ °° <>& ^ °°^NPv <$ 

a [*^r* A <*, '•..* .0* \s 4 vvv**' A <. *-o.»* -Cr *b 

^ . t ' • . nj> o * o * t * a <£ r\* o * o a .<& V _ i ' a ' ^ 

.% *£ cr •°_r^v% ^ ^ * r # u • c ,^yv% ~:> «-& t • ^ * *t> 



+ W£ml <v<* ( 

-.sB?.*. •» <■ asfPv] 

'<7VT’ A <*-••*• v 



A A ,. aa.'% 

*'- ^ -tu. <i 



A 

/ A 5 V •* 4> v ".^VV 

* A> v V *'T7V*' A <*, ''o,1* ,Cr v5 vt 3 .* 4 * A <v *'<>,»* ,i 

0^ o 0 w c ^ „ t *»+ q^ c 0 " G + # t ' • ^ q v 

oV^lkV* ^ .V^DV. ^ ^ A C . 



o v 


v ^ta* ^ ^ 

^ V »**°.4 A, j,v % 

*§mh//A\ 

*>-V ' 

v v v - 





•** 0 


o ^5 ^ 

j*>,U\\\S^ ** by * 

<£. -» <l” 

* 0 " 0 ,\V 




• ^ ** 
: a-A 


„ ^ ,A 11 

° ^r. <A « 

, ’, ^ V 

A vT - ^, [M ^ o v V<* 

A > 0 > • ^tlP^» A v 0 

* A. V ^ v 1 ^ 

AV <b '°^** ,A &, *'.. * s A <* ’® • * o 

.A • '■'** ^ or g° " 0 * ^o A'' . t' • * <s> 

>r V , c /^,w', ° A %* s c / 




^ 0 



^0 ^ S,. 1 o *. , , • ,0 'V * 

0 ^ V N •»*«- C\ .0^ S s * * % > 



* / % 

__ ^ ^ 4 ^J, 

..** A <\ 'o..* .o %b ■'/..» . . 

-x^ « 1 ' * •» ^ o^ c 0 " ° •* *^b •'■'»-» *^s 

-v C *^ 55 xv o j*o- *Vv?^* ^ 0 

. o V ^*o x - ^oK .£m%tvn« ^ o' 



o c 5 °^ 'fSSHBK ?v u ^ « 5 °^ 

A-. 1 A "> v % o. av s vV% v % .'* 0 * A> **•• 

♦ VSk^ . ^ A /ja^a.% ^ A®' ^ A /- R5i * 



* ^ % 

V <* '° - ‘'*A 0 ^ 'Xd '■'... . 

A .«•'«„ ^ 0 ^ c 0 " ° ■* ^o A % 

♦> / /^>\ V . c /^w:- ° ♦* 



« ^5 ^ 

^ * o; o ° c?~ °c 




X° ”7l» 

>* .-•- V'V ^.%*-V ••••-V"”A 1 v , 

• >Wa \ %/ :gg&\ %A \/ :». ^ ’ 


A --.** A \ *-^K- ♦* ^ -w^* A A - 

<v a0 v V s* A <> 'o. * - XT \r> .. 

c # 0 V C 0 N 0 -* ^O a V * 8 <£ n.v 0^0. V ^v> 

^ C •Vfsf^v^ o Str/rtTZ* + C • C U5^Vv> O 

♦*0« J^fe: -o^ :^»*. A 0 < •^” 



o ^ «2* 

jl. ^^vi\\\Nsp ** bv v 

J * o H o° Cp 

» • . T V a V 



o V 


• A V *V o 

* <V ^<V o 

• * A <A - O , f - V 

t » « ^ r> v 

j'jfoZ* + C° 

N + mf/Z?a- - , v 


^ 4^ ' 



-' »- 0 A '-,^K V .° jP’i- • 0 i ^’4 < i .- lc ?<. 

v—’ - A" A•-■•'V \^\A \'^ A h 

••* A.'wk:* > v' C' A .•"■• > v s •■•« 


♦ *6/ • ^/xiiPrz * a 

^ ^ A G - s • A 

^ c 0 ' .A,'•- °o A 

* A 0 < •»^&-. *bv* 



': %«+ 



• A , - r ‘ r> 

* «? ^ 

• A* % 

r 0 ^ t0 4J’ 

v-> • c^sVVv^ O 

V 5 * 0 AWT\'%. ^ 


,V °^. * » ' • A 0 % • • - 0 9 A* 

J . ’ * 0 , O 4.0 4 S *-*'v 4 > \/ »’* 0 , 

o V a a 

O 'j'_ o , •>- ,v 



’o'O 





c\ AJ * 4 
„ *P. ,A »• 

: ^ o s • 

. aV^ 1 





■.* . <? \ *!%y ,/ 7*. ^tp,* a & % WW.‘ / % •-'««»,• v '<?• - 

O ° • * ^> ' o 0 s * A <\ "o. > * (? *o */74 s * *\ 

• .0^ c 0 N 0 ■* J*<£ q v 0 w c # (O' 


w 






K o V 


^ vv «s* “ w// »« \\v * 

„_„ , *V %* oX/JS^XK 

*?7?7' A 

> 4* 

° ^ ' 1 
^O > 

p^t*. 'SIMS't »°7, 

>° v*-?^ - y °o '.^\-'\o° ■% 

'■■’ '> V N •••.. J- ,-V;, % 

’• 7- ** 4%- \. ^ 








^ V 

* ^ ^ 

vA V * $ 


0 " Q 


<> 

O > 


,* v % %f?P / \ ilgpv 

..*■.. V*’‘>.i^.V'"‘V 


<y o. 



’ • °- CV .9 *!V> > V - 

': \/ ;•»: : *i 

m^7 o iV^\ o TAVvC^VXV?' * r vfV 
■S * A> ^ V ^A ° 

l^T > V* V • K| * <L V , 1 * «•» 

.T* A <. '?.?* (? *o 

A :M%>' % « « ' 

V . % * ^cr ®« 


^ V * <L* HW ^ 

. y <+**•>' Jy o ^ .. s s / 

A^ • *• 1 » ^ 0^ o ° W 0 ♦ ^O 

^ A -*>^- ^ > .•■^*'- J ’ 

^5 V 
0 


O > 




\0 ^7* 

c tZf//IV4F ± ^ " 

%. / \ 
. ■ -•- cv aO > - 

° /0- ^ 

°^s s - 


>* . ^ 


^•V : 

L -<A ' 



- °o 

y ' * '*p t ' b''.. 

^ { u m it"- ? » I 4 A P T> 

V» , / f v*-— ■•’ f° v %'-^' y 

V o’*°' C>s ^ V N 

* : #lAo 

» ^ ^ v/\ 



* ^ \ 

<^ '^.^* ,0- ^o 

t -A!* ^ r 0 ^ 4 !rL°% ^ 

. -o / :£f&\ A 0 ^ ^*- A - - • 




* « 
»- ^ cr 




^ * <L^ - ^UMld^? o A>*^. * A 'S'n J * 

\P* V ^ * A > ^ oVJIak* ^ 

* A 0 ^ "..* 4 A <*> 'o.»* .0^ V A 

-0^ c 0 " c » ^O A 1 ^ . 1 ' « » ^V. 0^ c 0 " ° « "^O 

0 • O *r y ^L, C - 

_C^\\\Wk, .* ^ ♦ a&JTf/p-2 ~yr V/ 

^ A. v fr’WI///>*> » 

o V 


o «5 ^ 

'/ V T ^\/ % 

a0 v > v % »* * ~ - 

• V^K ^ - 

- ° c/ ♦ 


- ^ * <rOOv/ll<T s 

% / 
* • o . r% , 


^ -. 



•^o< 



■‘-0 

^ » 0, w vSU^-' > ? ' 7 ^ ^°- \' { 5M$ : » 0 "^ '• 

’* °° A'*-•*'/ v*-^>* ^‘^'•’*/ * 

_ - ^ V »’* 0 - cv A 0 V **’*'* ^ v o * * °' *c* 

°, ^4* °^!!!k; 4W/°, “Jllll" 

... ^ j?*- 




aV^ l e 

V * A 


^ 0 *k/J’^XN” * ^ o^VJ!^\H' * ■^ >< ^ v/ 4 • 

A ^ ‘ 'o. „** (? ^o, "’^Tvf*' *A < m 'o.>** .£■ , “ > ^7fs , ‘ a <* 

i ' t J a ^ * c 0^ o 0 " c •* % ^ t • «■ 1 ® * G 0^ o° wo - ^o ^ I* 1 * * 

. " O _0 O -0 <l ^ O 

^ O W o ° o + g , *» • A 1 0 ^ O N 0 0 O + 9 , 1 * 4 0 < *$> ♦ o N O 0 ^ 

4 > v % c\ a 0 ^ sjv^ v v % .jl• ^ o. .<r j. "> v % c 

■ W : 4Mi: : JSI' W -'f^fe", ■ 

^ '.Ha^.“ _* V A. 


4? 

,0^- ^ 


A O V7/y^\\\V • C^ ° A V ^ o V//^y^ * 

^y ovJp&AT* v ^ * ^V o ^ V ^ 

O ’-^T^ A ^ *'«.»'• 4 ^ ^o**? 7 ?*f*' A ^ *'o.. 4 * ^ ^ 

o M g * *^o ^ . t ' »^ o 0 w ° # ^O « *• 1 • 4 p ^ .Ci r. 0 w c ♦ 

o V 





**•'• f° *f> * 0 ,. o' C* O *.,,- ^0 V * 

^ v .;•»« O. A o v »*r 

- -’ •. U .<? :A¥r. * 

-i A * 




‘ O o o 0 U - 

■ / Q *t+ '•' a9 V, 

\> c\ A 0 V AV'% - 

^ A. ^rv^^A* Ta V* 

- : .* 

: /V '-©Bs * ^ V A. ■ 




O o A 


# . ^ vA' 

• o > 


•5^ ^ 

^o* : 


o H 0 ° O) 


, o 
• <iy 
or 


O 


Vv 

4> ^ Ti-TT-tL > 

? ^ a' °: v <£“% v V <L V ^ '-’ ^ , 

<# b s 4 A <. 'o. . * .(y \d s 4 A 

0 " 0 * ”^o jA .<■'*♦ ^ .o v c°"°* *^o ‘A 

'„ ^ ^ A C /^T<- - .N ♦ 




• k 



• ^ r • _ ^ 

A o v ,*vr% ^ v »;*»« cy A 

cy ♦ Qi|0% • a v ♦ (<00)i 0 

. ^ o «• ^ cw\(^^/yy7, ° 


^o° ^ *•#* 

V «•*•'. v> X/ 


A 

•07 Ax 

4 fl- V ^ri. - t-^r , 

a ,0 v *07r« ' 

'* % C° V .^44 % ^°o -A^ 

;- *bv* N 

,A Q. 





















Thirteenth Census of the: United States: 1910 


DEPARTMENT OF 
COMMERCE AND LABOR 


BULLETIN 


M.S, 


BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 
E. DANA DURAND, Director 


POPULATION : UNITED STATES 


POPULATION OF CITIES 

* 

Prepared under the supervision of WM. C. HUNT, Chief Statistician for Population 


INTRODUCTION. 


This bulletin contains a complete presentation of 
the material gathered at the census of 1910 in regard 
to the population of cities and other incorporated 
places of 2,500 inhabitants and over. The list of 
these cities and incorporated places, with their popu¬ 
lation at the last three censuses, is given in the final 
table of the bulletin. The population at each census 
since 1790 of the cities which now have more than 
100,000 inhabitants and the population at each census 
since 1850 of the cities which now have more than 

URBAN AND RUJ 

URBAN AND RURAL POPULATION DEFINED. 

The Census Bureau classifies as urban population 
that residing in cities and other incorporated places of 
2,500 inhabitants or more, including New England 
towns of that population. In most sections of the 
country all or practically all densely populated areas 
of tlxis size are set off from rural territory and incor¬ 
porated as municipalities (variously known as cities, 
towns, villages, boroughs, etc.). In New England, 
however, tills is often not the case. Some of the New 
England towns are densely populated throughout 
their area, and some are, on the other hand, strictly 
rural throughout. Many of the towns, however, con¬ 
sist in part of distinctly rural territory and in part of 
densely populated areas which are not incorporated 
separately and for which it is impossible to make sepa¬ 
rate population returns. For this reason it has been 
necessary in the New England states to include with 
the urban population residing in incorporated cities 
the population also of all towns having 2,500 inhabit¬ 
ants or more. The urban areas in New England, as 
classified by the census, therefore, include some popu¬ 
lation which, in other sections of the United States, 
would be segregated as rural. Nevertheless, in most 
of the New England towns of 2,500 inhabitants or 
more, the larger part of the population is embraced in 
the densely settled parts, so that the proportion of the. 
population classed as urban in the New England states 
is not so greatly exaggerated by the practice thus 
adopted as might appear at first thought. 

Urban population being thus defined, the remainder 

13—54—13 1940 


25,000 inhabitants are also given in separate tables. 
Other tables are presented showing the population 
residing in urban and rural communities, the distribu¬ 
tion of the population among the several classes of 
cities, and the growth in the urban and rural popula¬ 
tion and in that of the several groups of urban com¬ 
munities. The text treatment proceeds from the more 
general to the more special figures, taking up first the 
proportion of urban and rural population before con¬ 
sidering groups of cities and individual places. 

AL POPULATION. 

of the country or state is classed as rural, consisting 
(except in New England) of all unincorporated terri¬ 
tory and of incorporated places of less than 2,500 
inhabitants. 

The comparisons of the urban and rural population 
in 1910 with that at earlier enumerations may be made 
either with respect to the varying proportions of the 
two classes at successive enumerations or with respect 
to the increase between enumerations. In order to 
contrast the proportion of the total population living 
in urban or rural territory at the census of 1910 with 
the proportion urban or rural at the preceding census, 
it is necessary to classify the territory according to 
the conditions as they existed at each census. In tins 
comparison a place having less than 2,500 inhabitants 
in 1900 and over 2,500 in 1910 is classed with the rural 
territory for 1900 and with the urban for 1910. 
On the other hand, in order to present fairly the con¬ 
trast between urban and rural communities, as regards 
their rate of growth, it is necessary to consider the 
changes in population for the same territory which 
have occurred from one decennial census to another. 
For tills purpose the territory which in 1910 was 
urban or rural, as the case may be, is taken as the basis, 
and the population in 1900 for the same territory (so 
far as separately reported at that census) is presented, 
even though part of the territory may, on the basis 
of its population at the earlier census, have then been 
in a different class. This avoids the disturbing effect 
on comparisons which would arise from the passage, 
for example, of communities formerly classed as rural 
into the urban group. 

5 —12 


2—12 














PER CENT OF URBAN IN TOTAL POPULATION, BY STATES: 1910. 




■MINN. 


IOWA 


NEBR, 


KANS. 


;OKLAHOMA^ 


PER CENT OF URB^N 


LESS THAN 16 PER CENT 


26 TO 69 PER CENT 


60 TO 76 PER CENT 


PER CENT OF URBAN IN TOTAL POPULATION, BY STATES: 1900. 



( 2 ) 

P D - 7 1 o, cf ©T 

DEC 7 1912 







Thirteenth Census of the United States: 1910 


DEPARTMENT OF 
COMMERCE AND LABOR 


BULLETIN 


BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 
E. DANA DURAND, Director 


POPULATION : UNITED STATES 


CITIES AND THEIR SUBURBS 

Prepared under the supervision of WM. C, HUNT, Chief Statistician for Population 


In its general tables dealing with the population of 
cities, the Bureau of the Census must necessarily deal 
with political units, or, in other words, with the popula¬ 
tion contained within the municipal boundaries of each 
city. It is a familiar fact that, in some cases, the 
municipal boundaries give only an inadequate idea of 
the population grouped about one urban center. In 
the case of many cities there are suburban districts 
with a dense population outside the city limits, which, 
in a certain sense, are as truly a part of the city as the 
districts which are under the municipal government. 
These suburbs are bound to the cities by a network of 
transportation lines. Many of the residents in the 
suburbs have their business or employment in the city, 
and, to a certain extent, persons who reside in the city 
are employed in the suburbs. 

It seems desirable, therefore, to show the magnitude 
of each of these population centers taken as a whole. 
Statistics have been compiled for each city in the 
United States with a population of 100,000 inhabitants 
or more, which, in addition to the population within 
the city limits, show the population in adjoining 
districts which may be considered as intimately associ¬ 
ated with the urban center. Two different methods 
of procedure have been adopted. 

(1) For all cities having a population of 100,000 
inhabitants within their municipal boundaries a com¬ 
putation has been made of the total population in civil 
divisions within 10 miles of the city boundary. The 
areas thus mapped out may be briefly defined as “ cities 
and adjacent territory.” 

(2) In the case of all cities having within their own 
boundaries 200,000 inhabitants or more, the bureau 
has also mapped out what may be termed “ metro¬ 
politan districts,” which besides the city itself include 
those sections of the adjacent territory which may be 
considered as urban in character. In order to secure 
this result, a subtraction is made from the total popu¬ 
lation in the “adjacent territory” of the number of 
persons in those civil divisions which do not reach 
such a density of population as would justify their 
being considered as urban in character. 

13—M—4 


Method of defining districts.—In laying out the two 
classes of districts the population is first determined 
for all civil divisions (that is, cities, towns, boroughs, 
townships, precincts, etc.) located within 10 miles of 
the city boundaries. Divisions which lie partly within 
and partly without the 10-mile limit are included if 
either one-half of their total population or one-half of 
their total area comes within that limit. State bound¬ 
aries are disregarded, so that in some cases the adj a- 
cent territory and the metropolitan district lie partly 
in two states. The area within the 10-mile limit thus 
defined is, of course, a very different thing from a circle 
drawn with a radius of 10 miles from the center of the 
city; nor is it the area included within a line drawn 
parallel to the city boundary at an exact distance of 
10 miles, because in making up the “adjacent terri¬ 
tory” no civil divisions can be subdivided. Hence 
the outline of the area can not follow geometrical 
lines, but must conform to the boundaries of the po¬ 
litical divisions which are on the outer edge of the 
included area. Owing to this fact, the boundaries of 
the adjacent territory thus defined may vary consid¬ 
erably in their actual distance from the city lines. 

In defining the area of “metropolitan districts,” 
there have been deducted from the adjacent territory 
all divisions which have a population of less than 
about 150 or 200 inhabitants per square mile. Where 
the density of population is less, the division may be 
considered as rural rather than urban in character, 
and is not property a part of the metropolitan district. 
There are a few exceptions to this rule where a minor 
civil division has been included within the metropolitan 
district, even though it had a lower density than that 
just stated, because that division was completely or 
almost surrounded by other civil divisions having a 
density which would require them to be included. 
The exception in such cases seems justified in order to 
avoid undue irregularity in the shape of the districts, 
or gaps tying wholly within their area. 

In short, the city with its “adjacent territory,” as 
here defined, includes the central city, and in addition 
all cities, towns, villages, or other divisions located 

3—12 


31455-12 


H j 

i 1 








2 


STATISTICS OF POPULATION—CITIES 


within 10 miles of the boundary of the central city. 
The metropolitan district includes, besides the central 
city, all divisions within the 10-mile limit which have 
a density of population of about 150 persons per square 
mile or more. Because of the urban character of the 
area defined as the metropolitan district, and because 
such districts have been defined in connection with 
the larger cities, they may first receive attention. 

Metropolitan districts.—The metropolitan district 
has already been defined, in a general way, as consist¬ 
ing of the city together with the urban portion of the 
territory lying within 10 miles of the city limits. Two 
slight exceptions to the application of the definition 
may be noted. The strict application of the rules to 
the metropolitan district of Boston would give an area 
which would be almost but not quite identical with the 
area of the “industrial district’' of Boston, as defined 
by the Bureau of the Census in its Bulletin 101, issued 




tfV & rY 




in 1906. For convenience of comparison, therefore, 
the area then determined as the industrial district is 
now considered as the metropolitan district. The same 
is true of New York City, except that Nassau County, 
immediately adjoining the* city boundary, which was 
not included in the industrial district, has been added 
to the metropolitan district. In the case of the 12 
other industrial districts covered by Bulletin 101, the 
areas were so different from those which resulted from 
the application of the methods here described that 
they have not been followed. The following table 
shows for 1910 and 1900 the population of 25 metro¬ 
politan districts as defined by the Census Bureau, 
distinguishing the population lying within the city 
proper from that outside the city. It also gives for 
each city the population of the city with its adjacent- 
territory. The cities are arranged in the order of the 
aggregate population of the metropolitan district. 



CITIES OP 200,000 INHABITANTS OK MOKE. 

CITY. 


Population. 

Per 

cent 


Area in 
acres. 

1910 

1900 

of in¬ 
crease, 
1900- 
1910. 

Total for 25 metropolitan dls- 





trlcts. 

4,717,532.2 

22,088,331 

16,322,800 

35.3 

In cities. 

1,185,795.8 

17,099,904 

12,833,201 

33.2 

Outside cities. 

3,531,736.4 

4,988,427 

3,489,599 

43.0 

Cities and adjacent territory. 

11,477,658.7 

23,018,533 

17,100,206 

34.6 

Adjacent territory. 

10,291,862.9 

5,918,629 

4,267,005 

38.7 

NEW YORK. 





Metropolitan district. 

616,927.6 

6,474,568 

4,607,804 

40.5 

In city proper. 

183,555.0 

4,766,883 

3,437,202 

38.7 

Outside. 

433,372.6 

1,707,685 

1,170,602 

45.9 

City and adjacent territory. 

875,515.2 

6,630,599 

4,718,255 

40.5 

Adjacent territory. 

691,960.2 

1,863,716 

1,281,053 

45.5 

CHICAGO. 





Metropolitan district. 

409,086.7 

2,446,921 

1,837,987 

33.1 

In city proper. 

118,433.1 

2,185,283 

1,698,575 

28.7 

Outside. 

290,653.6 

261,638 

139,412 

87.7 

City and adjacent territory. 

535,911.5 

2,461,764 

1,850,739 

33.0 

Adjacent territory. 

417,478.4 

276,481 

1.52,164 

81.7 

PHILADELPHIA. 





Metropolitan district. 

437,732.5 

1,972,342 

1,623,149 

21.5 

In city proper. 

83,340.0 

1,549,008 

1,293,697 

19.7 

Outside. 

354,392.5 

423,334 

329,452 

28.5 

City and adjacent territory. 

715,000.8 

2,015,560 

1,661,522 

21.3 

Adjacent territory. 

631,660.8 

466,552 

367,825 

26.8 

BOSTON. 





Metropolitan district. 

335,904.7 

1,520,470 

1,249,504 

21.7 

In city proper. 

26,289.0 

670,5S5 

560,892 

19.6 

Outside. 

309,615.7 

849,885 

688,612 

23.4 

City and adjacent territory. 

401,568.0 

1,543,723 

1,269,384 

21.6 

Adjacent territory. 

375,279.0 

873,138 

708,492 

23.2 

PITTSBURGH. 





Metropolitan district. 

405,880.1 

1,042,855 

792,968 

31.5 

In city proper. 

26,510.7 

533,905 

451,512 

18.2 

Outside. 

379,369.4 

50S,950 

341,456 

49.1 

City and adjacent territory. 

543,609.6 

1,060,797 

806,564 

31.5 

Adjacent territory. 

517,09S. 9 

526,892 

355,052 

48.4 

ST. LOUIS. 





Metropolitan district. 

197,993.4 

828,733 

649,711 

27.6 

In city proper. 

39,276.3 

687,029 

575,238 

19.4 

Outside. 

158,717.1 

141,704 

74,473 

90.3 

City and adjacent territory. 

456,593.7 

881,927 

694,342 

27.0 

Adjacent territory. 

417,317.4 

194,898 

119,104 

63.6 



CITIES OF 

200,000 INHABITANTS OR MORE. 

CITY. 


Population. 

Per 

cent 


Area in 
acres. 

1910 

1900 

of in¬ 
crease, 
1900- 
mo. 

SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND. 





Metropolitan district. 

289,380.8 

686,873 

473,073 

45.2 

In city proper (San Francisco). 

29,760.0 

416,912 

342,782 

21.6 

In city proper (Oakland). 

29,248.0 

150,174 

66,960 

124.3 

Outside.... 

230,372.8 

119,787 

63,331 

89.1 

Cities and adjacent territory. 

384,760.0 

692,654 

474,453 

46.0 

Adjacent territory. 

325,752.0 

125,568 

64,711 

94.0 

BALTIMORE. 





Metropolitan district. 

184,659.8 

658,715 

577,670 

14.0 

In citv proper. 

19,290.2 

558,485 

508,957 

9.7 

Outside. 

165,369.6 

100,230 

68,713 

45.9 

City and adjacent territory. 

340,352.0 

679,644 

599,406 

13.4 

Adjacent territory. 

321,061.8 

121,159 

90,449 

34.0 

CLEVELAND. 





Metropolitan district. 

103,173.6 

613,270 

420,020 

46.0 

In city proper. 

29,208.8 

560,663 

381,768 

46.9 

Outside. 

73,964.8 

52,607 

38,252 

37.5 

City and adjacent territory. 

332,019.2 

642,355 

443,808 

44.7 

Adjacent territory. 

302,810.4 

81,692 

62,040 

31.7 

CINCINNATI. 





Metropolitan district. 

111,771.7 

563,804 

495,979 

13.7 

In city proper. 

31,893.3 

363,591 

325,902 

11.6 

Outside. 

79,878.4 

200,213 

170,077 

17.7 

City and adjacent territory. 

512,646.4 

594,920 

530,563 

12.1 

Adjacent territory. 

480,753.1 

231,329 

204,661 

13.0 

MINNEAPOLIS—ST. PAUL. 





Metropolitan district. 

94,539.0 

526,256 

372,009 

41.5 

In city proper (Minneapolis).. 

32,069.0 

301,408 

202,718 

48.7 

In city proper (St.. Paul). 

33,390.0 

214,744 

163,065 

31.7 

Outside. 

. 29,080.0 

10,104 

6,226 

62.3 

Cities and adjacent territory....... 

638,859.4 

571,469 

410,934 

39.1 

Adjacent territory. 

573,400.4 

55,317 

45,151 

22.5 

DETROIT. 





Metropolitan district. 

96,553.8 

500,982 

318,967 

57.1 

In city proper. 

26,102.6 

465,766 

285,704 

63.0 

Outside. 

70,451.2 

35,216 

33,263 

5.9 

City and adjacent territory. 

271,840.0 

521,233 

337,163 

54.6 

Adjacent territory. 

245,737.4 

55,467 

51,459 

7.8 

BUFFALO. 





Metropolitan district. 

132,413.4 

488,661 

394,031 

24.0 

In city proper. 

24,791.0 

423,715 

352,387 

20.2 

Outside*. 

107,622.4 

64,946 

41,644 

56.0 

City and adjacent territory. 

306,867.2 

508,232 

412,731 

23.1 

Adjacent territory. 

282,076.2 

84,517 

60,344 

40.1 


n 






































































































STATISTICS OF POPULATION—CITIES 


3 


CITIES OF 200,000 INHABITANTS OR MORE. 


CITIES OF 200,000 INHABITANTS OR MORE. 


CITY. 


Population. 

Per 

cent 


Area in 
acres. 

1910 

1900 

of in¬ 
crease, 1 
1900- 
1910. 

LOS ANGELES. 

Metropolitan district. 

252,826.8 

438,226 

123,062 

256.1 

In citv proper. 

63,480 0 

319,198 

102,479 

211.5 

Outside. 

189,346.8 

119,028 

20,583 

478.3 j 

City and adjacent territory. 

652,613.4 

468,080 

152,052 

207.8 

Adjacent territory. 

589,133.4 

148,882 

49,573 

200.3 

MILWAUKEE. 





Metropolitan district. 

112,339.4 

427,175 

324,963 

31.5 , 

In city proper. 

14.585.8 

373,857 

285,315 

31.0 

Outside'. 

97,753.6 

53,318 

39,648 

34.5 

City and adjacent territory. 

215,396.7 

440,206 

336,635 

30.8 

Adjacent territory. 

200,810.9 

66,349 

51,320 

29.3 

PROVIDENCE. 





Metropolitan district.. 

In city proper. 

126,469.4 

11,352.2 

395,972 

224,326 

306,110 

175,597 

29.4 

27.8 

Outside’. 

115,117.2 

171,646 

130,513 

31.5 

City and adjacent territory. 

271,590.4 

489,772 

377,249 

29.8 

Adjacent territory. 

260,238.2 

265,446 

201,652 

31.0 

WASHINGTON. 





Metropolitan district. 

190,389.2 

367,869 

305,684 

20.3 

In city proper. 

38,408. 4 

331,069 

278,718 

18.8 

Outside*. 

151,980.8 

36,800 

26,906 

36.5 1 

City and adjacent territory. 

550,169.6 

413,458 

346,432 

19.3 

Adjacent territory. 

511,761.2 

82,389 

07,714 

21.7 

NEW ORLEANS. 





Metropolitan district. 

137,760.0 

' 348,109 

294,015 

18.2 

In city proper. 

125,440.0 

339,075 

287,104 

18.1 

Outside. 

12,320.0 

9,034 

7,511 

20.3 j 

City and adjacent territory. 

373,145.6 

367,235 

310,551 

18.3 

Adjacent territory. 

247,705.0 

28,100 

23,447 

20.1 

KANSAS CITY (MO. AND KANS.). 

Metropolitan district. 

62,030.5 

340,446 

228,235 

49.2 

In city proper (Kansas City, 





Mo.). 

37,443.0 

248,381 

163,752 

51.7 

In city proper (Kansas City, 


Kans.). 

10,940.0 

82,331 

51,418 

60.1 

Outside. 

13,047.5 

9,734 

13,065 

-25.5 

Cities and adjacent territory. 

620,748.8 

391,632 

276,375 

41.7 

Adjacent territory. 

572,365.8 

60,920 

61,205 

—0.5 


CITY. 

Area in 
acres. 

Population. 

1910 1900 

Per 
cent 
of in¬ 
creased 
1900- 
lalO. 

LOUISVILLE. 





Metropolitan district. 

141,504.9 

286,158 

259,856 

10.1 

In city proper. 

13,229.7 

223,928 

204,731 

9.4 

Outside".. 

128,275.2 

62,230 

55,125 

12.9 

City and adjacent territory. 

472,505.6 

317,743 

288,372 

10.2 

Adjacent territory. 

459,275.9 

93,815 

83,641 

12.2 

ROCHESTER. 





Metropolitan district. 

119,506.7 

248,512 

185,409 

34.0 

In city proper. 

12,876.3 

218,149 

162,608 

34.2 

Outside. 

106,630.4 

30,363 

22,801 

33.2 

City and adj acent territory. 

315,392.0 

270,288 

205,407 

31.6 

Adjacent territory. 

302,515.7 

52,139 

42,799 

21.8 

SEATTLE. 





Metropolitan district. 

41,151.6 

239,269 

80,885 

195.8 

In city proper. 

35,750.0 

237,194 

80,671 

194.0 

Outside. 

5,401.6 

2,075 

214 

869.6 

City and adjacent territory. 

375,449.6 

272,189 

103,950 

161.8 

Adjacent territory. 

339,699.6 

34,995 

23,279 

50.3 

INDIANAPOLIS. 





Metropolitan district. 

27,850.4 

237,783 

173,632 

36.9 

In city proper. 

21,130.4 

233,650 

169,164 

38.1 

Outside. 

6,720.0 

4,133 

4,468 

-7.5 

City and adjacent territory. 

465,542.4 j 

2S3,226 

216,537 

30.8 

Adjacent territory. 

444,412.0 i 

49,576 

47,373 

4.7 

DENVER. 





Metropolitan district. 

46,148.0 

219,314 

135,809 

61.5 

In city proper. 

37,028.0 

213,381 

133,859 

59.4 

Outside.. 

9,120.0 

5,933 

1,950 

204.3 

City and adjacent territory. 

460,390.4 

240,082 

155,582 

54.3 

Adjacent territory. 

423,362.4 

26,701 

21,723 

22.9 

PORTLAND, OREG. 





Metropolitan district. 

43,538.2 

215,048 

91,668 

134.6 

In city proper. 

30,975.0 

207,214 

90,426 

129.2 

Outside. 

12,563.2 

7,834 

1,242 

530.8 

City and adjacent territory. 

389,171.2 

259,745 

121,200 

114.3 

Adjacent territory. 

358,196.2 i 

52,531 

30,774 

70.7 


1 A minus sign (—) denotes decrease. 


Note.— The following statement gives the name and population of each munic¬ 
ipality of 5,000 inhabitants or more falling within the territory adjacent to 
each of the above cities: 

New York district.—New York: Yonkers city, 79,803; Mount Vernon city, 30,919; 
New Rocbellecity, 28,867; Mamaroneck village, 5,699. New Jersey : Newark 
city, 347,469; Jersey City, 267,779; Paterson city, 125,600; Elizabeth city, 73,409; 
Iloboken city, 70,324; Bayonne city, 55,545; Passaic city, 54,773; West Hobo¬ 
ken town, 35,403; East Orange citv, 34,371; Perth Amboy city, 32,121; Orange 
city, 29,630; Montclair town. 21,550; Union town, 21,023; Kearny town, 18,659; 
Bloomfield town, 15,070; Harrison town, 14,498; Hackensack town, 14,050; 
West New York town, 13,500; Irvington town, 11,877; Englewood city, 9,924: 
Rahway city, 9,337; Rutherford borough, 7,045; South Orange village, 0,014; 
Nutlev town, 6,009; Roosevelt borough, 5,786; Guttenberg town, 5,647. 

Chicago district.— Illinois: Evanston city, 24,978; Oak Park village, 19,444; Cicero 
town, 14,557; Chicago Heights city, 14,525; Blue Island village, 8,043; May- 
wood village, 8,033; Ilarvevcity, 7,227; Forest Park village, 6,594; Berwyn city, 
5,841; La Grange village, 5,282. Indiana: Hammond city, 20,925; East Chicago 
city, 19,098; Gary city, 16,802; Whiting city, 6,587. 

Philadelphia district— Pennsylvania: Chester city, 38,537; Norristown borough, 
27,875; Bristol borough, 9,256; Conshohocken borough, 7,480; Darby borough, 
6,305. New Jersey: Camden city, 94,538; Gloucester city, 9,462; Burlington 
city, 8,336. 

Boston district .—Cambridge citv, 104,839; Lynn city, 89,336; Somerville city, 77,236; 
Malden city, 44,404; Salem city, 43,697; Newton city, 39,806; Everett city, 
33,484; Quincy city, 32,642; Chelsea citv, 32,452; Waltham city, 27,834; Brook¬ 
line town, 27,792; Medford city, 23,150; Revere town, 18,219; Peabody town, 
15,721; Melrose city, 15,715; Hyde Park town, 15,.507; Woburn city, 15,308; 
Framingham town, 12,948; Weymouth town, 12,895; Watertown town, 12,875; 
Wakefield town, 11.404; Arlington town, 11,187; Winthrop town, 10,132; Na¬ 
tick town, 9,866; Winchester town, 9,309; Dedham town, 9,284; Braintree 
(own, 8,066; Saugus town, 8,047; Norwood town, 8,014; Milton town, 7,924; 
Marblehead town, 7,338; Stoneham town, 7,090; Swampscott town, 6,204; Bel¬ 
mont town, 5,542; Wellesley town, 5,413; Needham town, 5,026. 


Pittsburgh district .—MeKeesport city. 42,694; Braddock borough, 19,357; Wilkins- 
burg borough, 18,924; Homestead borough, 18,713; Duquesne borough, 15,727; 
McKees Rocks borough, 14,702; North Braddock borough, 11,824; Carnegie 
borough, 10,009; Sharpsburg borough, 8,153; Jeanette borough, 8,077; Millvale 
borough, 7,861; New Kensington borough, 7,707; Tarentum borough, 7,414; 
Swissvale borough, 7,381; Bellevue borough, 6,323; Wilmerding borough, 
6,133; Carrick borough, 6,117; Rankin borough, 6,042; Etna borough, 5,830; 
Knoxville borough, 5,651; St. Clair borough, 5,640; East Pittsburgh borough, 
5,615; Glassport borough, 5,540; Coraopolis borough, 5,252; Munhall borough, 
5,185. 

St. Louis district. —Missouri: Wellston city, 7,312; Webster Groves city, 7,080. 

Illinois: East St. Louis city, 58,547; Granite city, 9,903; Madison village, 5,046. 
San Francisco-Oakland district. — Berkeley city, 40,434; Alameda city, 23,383; 

Richmond city, 6,802; San Rafael city, 5,934. 

Cleveland district— Lakewood city, 15,1-Si; East Cleveland city, 9,179; Newburgh 
city, 5,813. 

Cincinnati district.— Ohio: Norwood city, 16,185; Madisonville city, 5,193; St. 
Bernard city, 5,002. Kentucky: Covington city, 53,270; Newport city, 30,309; 
Dayton city, 6,979; Bellevue city, 6,683. 

Defroit district .—Wyandotte city, 8,287. 

Buffalo district .—Lackawanna city, 14,549; North Tonawanda city, 11,955; Tona- 
wanda city, 8,290. 

Los Angeles district .—Pasadena city, 30,291; Long Beach city, 17,809; Santa Monica 
city, 7,847; Alhambra city, 5,021. 

Milwaukee district .—West Allis city, 6,645; South Milwaukee city, 6,092. 

Providence district .—Pawtucket city, 51,622; Warwick town, 26,629; Central Falls * 
city, 22,754; Cranston city, 2ljl07; East Providence town, 15,808; Cumber¬ 
land town, 10,107; Lincoln town, 9,825; Johnston town, 5,935; North Provi¬ 
dence town, 5,407. 

Washington district .—Alexandria city (Va.), 15,329 

Kansas City ( Mo. and Kans.) district .—Rosedalecity (Kans.), 5,960. 

Louisville district.— Indiana: New Albany city, 20,629; Jeffersonville city, 10,412. 























































































































4 


STATISTICS OF POPULATION—CITIES. 


It will be noted that two cities of 200,000 inhabitants 
or more—Newark and Jersey City—do not appear in 
the table, for the reason that they are included within 
the metropolitan district of New York. 

The importance of the suburbs of great cities is 
conspicuously indicated by the combined statistics 
for the 25 metropolitan districts, which appear at the 
top of the table. The combined population of the 
metropolitan districts in 1910 was 22,088,331, of 
which 17,099,904 represents the population, of the 
central cities and 4,988,427 that of the suburban 
areas, the latter being equal to nearly 30 per cent of 
the population of the cities proper. It may be noted 
in this connection that the figure of 17,099,904 rep¬ 
resents the population of 28 cities, since there are 
three metropolitan districts in each of which there are 
two cities of such large population that both are treated 
as the central cities of the district, namely, Minne¬ 
apolis and St. Paul; Kansas City, Kans., and Kansas 
City, Mo.; and San Francisco and Oakland. 

The table shows further that the population of the 
metropolitan districts lying outside of the central 
cities has increased somewhat more rapidly than that 
within their boundaries, the increase since 1900 being 
43 per cent for the suburban districts and 33.2 per 
cent for the cities proper. In addition to the strictly 
urban population of the 25 metropolitan districts, 
there are nearly 1,000,000 people residing in other 
adjacent territory—that is, in divisions which lie wholly, 
or in greater part, within 10 miles of the boundaries 
of the central cities in which the density of population 
is not sufficient to justify calling them strictly urban. 
The total population of the cities in the metropolitan 
districts plus that of other “ adj acent territory” is 
23,018,533. This, in other words, is the total popu¬ 
lation which lives either in cities of not less than 
200,000 inhabitants or within 10 miles of such cities. 
It constitutes 25 per cent of the total population of 
continental United States. 

It will be noted from the table on pages 2 and 3 
that there are great differences among the several 
metropolitan districts with respect to the proportion 
which the population outside of the central city rep¬ 
resents of the total population of the district. These 
differences are due to the fact that some of the large 
cities have made no annexations of territory for many 
years, while in others extensive annexations have been 
made, so that most of the densely populated area within 
the metropolitan district has been added to the city 
itself. The column in the table giving the area of the 
various districts shows that there is very little corre¬ 
spondence between the population of the central cities 


and their area, some cities having several times as much 
area per inhabitant as others. This difference in policy 
with regard to the extension of municipal boundaries 
makes it the more obviously necessary to exclude 
thinly settled areas in the neighborhood of the cities 
in calculating the true metropolitan population; for, 
in the case of a city which has very extensive bound¬ 
aries, there is also necessarily a very large area in civil 
divisions lying within 10 miles of the boundary, and 
naturally the population of many such divisions is 
likely to be rural rather than urban in character. 

The foregoing table emphasizes the well-known fact 
that the cities of the country have quite a different 
rank when their suburbs are taken into account from 
that which they hold when only the population within 
the city boundaries proper is considered. 

Cities of 100,000 to 200,000 and their adjacent 
territory. —The table on page 5 shows, for each city 
having from 100,000 to 200 000 inhabitants, the popu¬ 
lation within the city proper, the population in other 
civil divisions all or more than half of which (in area 
or population) lie within 10 miles of the city boundary, 
and the combined population of the city and such adja¬ 
cent territory. In three cases cities of 100 000 to 
200,000 inhabitants do not appear in this list because 
they are absorbed in larger districts. This is true of 
Paterson, N. J. which forms part of the New York dis¬ 
trict; of Cambridge, Mass., which forms part of the 
Boston district; and of Oakland, Cal., which forms a 
part of the San Francisco district, given in the pre¬ 
ceding table. It will be further noted that in three 
cases there are one or more cities within such adja¬ 
cent territory which approximate in population the 
central city itself. or this reason the names of such 
smaller cities are inserted in connection with that of 
the larger city from whose boundaries the distances are 
determined. 

For reasons already stated, it should not be con¬ 
sidered that all of the population included in the follow¬ 
ing table is strictly urban in character or that the fig¬ 
ures furnish an accurate comparison of the relative 
importance of the several cities as centers of urban 
population. Nevertheless, they do give a rough idea 
of such relative importance. The combined popula¬ 
tion in 1910 of the 19 cities covered by this table, 
together with their adjacent territory, was 4,002,285, 
of which 2,438,878 represents the population in the 
19 principal cities themselves and 1,563,407 the popu¬ 
lation in adjacent territory. It will be noted that the 
population of the adjacent territory has increased less 
rapidly thaD that of the cities themselves. 






STATISTICS OF POPULATION—CITIES 


5 


CITIES OF 100,000 TO 200,000 INHABITANTS. 


CITIES OF 100,000 TO 200,000 INHABITANTS. 


CITY. 

Area in 
acres. 

Population. 

Per cent 
of in¬ 
crease, 1 
1900- 
1910. 

1910 

1900 

Total for 19 districts. 

6,815,372.8 

4,002,285 

3,090,007 

29.5 

Total in cities. 

268,610.5 

2,438.878 

1,768,032 

37.9 

Total outside cities. 

6,546,762.3 

1,563,407 

1,321,975 

18.3 

ALBANY. 




“ 

(Including Troy and Schenectady.) 





Total in city and outside. 

378,764.8 

349,836 

297,094 

17.8 

In Albany. 

6,913.7 

100,253 

94,151 

6.5 

Outside Albany. 

371,851.1 

249,583 

202,943 

23.0 

SCRANTON. 





Total in city and outside. 

324,096.0 

314,538 

235,039 

33.8 

In city proper. 

12,361.7 

129,867 

102,026 

27.3 

Outside city proper. 

311,734.3 

184,671 

133,013 

38.8 

FALL RIVER. 





(Including New Bedford.) 





Total in city and outside. 

331,340.8 

284,938 

226,731 

25.7 

In Fall River. 

21,722.0 

119,295 

104,863 

13.8 

Outside Fall River. 

309,618.8 

165,643 

12i;868 

35.9 

LOWELL. 





(Including Lawrence.) 





Total in city and outside. 

411,552.0 

283,741 

238,246 

19.1 

In Lowell. 

8,308.0 

106,294 

94,969 

11.9 

Outside Lowell. 

403,244.0 

177,447 

143,277 

23.8 

NEW HAVEN. 





Total in city and outside. 

250,816.0 

224,901 

182,315 

23.4 

In city proper. 

11,400.0 

133,605 

108,027 

23.7 

Outside city proper. 

239,356.0 

91,296 

74,288 

22.9 

WORCESTER. 





Total in city and outside... 

398,905.6 

222,732 

194,653 

14.4 

In city proper. 

23,683.0 

145,986 

118,421 

23.3 

Outside city proper. 

375,222.6 

76,746 

76,232 

0.7 

COLUMBUS. 





Total in city and outside. 

374,963.2 

221,567 

164,460 

34.7 

In city proper. 

13,017.8 

181,511 

125,560 

44.6 

Outside city proper. 

361,945.4 

40,056 

38,900 

3.0 

BIRMINGHAM. 





Total in city and outside. 

455,334.4 

211,961 

129,131 

64.1 

In city proper. 

30,881.2 

132,685 

38,415 

245.4 

Outside city proper. 

424,453. 2 

79,276 

90,716 

-12.6 

ATLANTA. 





Total in city and outside. 

364,723.2 

208,284 

141,023 

47.7 

In city proper. 

16,428.0 

154,839 

89,872 

72.3 

Outside city proper. 

348,295.2 

53,445 

51,151 

4.5 


CITY. 


OMAHA. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

TOLEDO. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

SYRACUSE. 

Total in city and outside. 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

MEMPHIS. 

Total in city and outside. 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

RICHMOND. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

BRIDGEPORT. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

DAYTON. 

Total in city and outside. 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

NASHVILLE. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

GRAND RAPIDS. 

Total in city and outside. 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 

SPOKANE. 

Total in city and outside 

In city proper. 

Outside city proper.. 


Area in 
acres. 

Population. 

Percent 
of in¬ 
crease, 1 
1900- 
1910. 

1910 

1900 

396,339.2 

206,749 

175,133 

IS. 1 

15,400.0 

124,096 

102,555 

21.0 

380,939.2 

82,653 

72,578 

13.9 

334,297.6 

203,748 

* 

164,198 

24.1 

16,025.6 

168,497 

131,822 

27.8 

318,272.0 

35,251 

32,376 

8.9 

329,542. 4 

183,462 

150,853 

21.6 

11,083.6 

137,249 

108,374 

26.6 

318,458.8 

46,213 

42,479 

8.8 

375,020.8 

175,183 

137,462 

27.4 

11,759.9 

131,105 

102,320 

28.1 

363,260.9 

44,078 

35,142 

25.4 

475,942.4 

168,854 

119,645 

41.1 

6,388.0 

127,628 

S5,050 

50.1 

469,554.4 

41,226 

34,595 

19.2 

195,929.6 

156,765 

116,117 

35.0 

7,906.0 

102,054 

70,996 

43.7 

188,023.6 

54,711 

45,121 

21.3 

337,158.4 

163,646 

130,917 

25.0 

10,061.0 

116,577 

85,333 

36.6 

327,097.4 

47,069 

45,584 

3.3 

373,248.0 

150,910 

124,642 

21.1 

10,942.0 

110,364 

80,865 

36.5 

362,306.0 

40,546 

43,777 

-7.4 

315,360.0 

145,632 

114,898 

26.7 

10,730.0 

112,571 

87,565 

28.6 

304,630.0 

33,061 

27,333 

21.0 

392,038.4 

124,83S 

47,450 

163.1 

23,539.0 

104,402 

36,848 

183. 3 

368,499.4 

20,436 

10,602 

92.8 


i A minus sign (—) 


denotes decrease. 


Note.—T he following statement gives the name and population of each munici¬ 
pality of 5,000 inhabitants or more falling within the territory adjacent to each of 
the above cities: 

Albany district.— Troy city, 76,813; Schenectady city, 72,826; Cohoes city, 24,709; 

Watervlietcity, 15,074; Rensselaer city, 10,711. 

Scranton district. —Dunmore borough, 17,615; Carbondale city, 17,040; Pittston 
city, 16,267; Old Forge borough, 11,324; Dickson City borough, 9,331; Taylor 
borough, 9,060; Olyphant borough, 8,505; Duryea borough, 7,487; Archbald 
borough, 7,194; West Pittston borough, 6,848; Blakeley borough, 5,345; Winton 
borough, 5,280; Throop borough, 5,133. 

Fall River district.— New Bedford city, 96,652; Taunton city, 34,259; Fairhaven 
town, 5,122. 

The fact that the population of the adjacent territory 
is more nearly equal to that of the central cities in the 
figures given in the above table than in those given in 
the preceding table should not be misunderstood. It 
does not imply that the smaller cities have relatively 
more important suburbs than the larger. It is due to 
two facts, namel}', (1) that in the combined area of the 
city and its adjacent territory, the smaller the size of the 
city the greater relatively is the share of the adjacent 
area in this total; (2) that in the present table a number 
of cities are included, principally in New York and in 
New England, in whose “adjacent territory” there 
are other cities of large size which can not in any true 


Lowell district.— Massachusetts: Lawrence city, 85,892; Methuen town, 11,448; 
Andover town, 7,301; Concord town, 6,421; North Andover town 5,529; 
Chelmsford town, 5,010. New Hampshire: Nashua city, 26,005. 

New Haven district. —Ansonia city, 15,152; Naugatuck borough, 12,722; Derby city, 
8,991; Wallingford borough, 8,690; West Haven borough, 8,543. 

Worcester district. —Clinton town, 13,075; Northbridge town, 8,807; Spencer town, 
6,740; Grafton town, 5,705; Westborough town, 5,446. 

Birmingham district. —Bessemer city, 10,864. 

Omaha district. —Nebraska: South Omaha city, 26,259. Iowa: Council Bluffs city, 
29,292. 

Syracuse district.— Solvay village, 5,139. 

Bridgeport district.— South Norwalk city, 8,968; Norwalk city, 6,954. 

sense be considered suburbs. Troy and Schenectady 
can not be considered as suburbs of Albany, but these 
three cities combined, together with other adjacent 
territory, constitute what may in a sense be consid¬ 
ered as a single large urban center. For convenience in 
interpreting each table in this respect there is appended 
to it a note, giving the name and population of each 
municipality of 5,000 inhabitants or more falling within 
the territory adjacent to each of the principal cities 
listed. To what extent any of these outlying cities are 
to be considered as depending upon the central city or 
constituting its suburbs, this report does not attempt 
to discuss. 




















































































































6 


STATISTICS OF POPULATION—CITIES. 


The following is a condensed summary of the sta¬ 
tistics in the two preceding tables. It thus covers 44 
districts and shows the total population within the 47 
cities which give their names to these districts, plus 
that in adjacent territory—that is, subdivisions within 
10 miles of their boundaries. While a considerable 
number, perhaps in the neighborhood of 2,000,000, 
ot the population thus included, is more or less rural 
in character, nevertheless the table gives a compre¬ 
hensive idea of the importance of the great urban cen¬ 
ters of the country. 

It will be seen that the total population of these 
districts in 1910 was 27,020,818, which is equal to 


nearly 30 per cent of the total population of the 
United States. The population of these districts 
has increased a trifle over one-third during the past 
10 years, it being noteworthy that the percentage of 
increase in the cities proper has been almost pre¬ 
cisely the same as that in the adjacent territory. 



Area in 
acres. 

POPULATION. 

INCREASE. 

1910 

1900 

Number. 

Per 

cent. 

Total in 44 districts. 

Total in 47 central cities.. 
Total in adjacent territory 

18,293,031.5 

1,454,400.3 

16,838,625.2 

27,020,818 
19,538,782 
7,482,036 

20,190,213 
14,601,233 
5,588,980 

6,830,605 

4,937,549 

1,893,056 

33.8 

33.8 

33.9 


o 





P D-71'* 




■ . i 








































•'’• A % ‘° 9 °° A 0 V *•.'• A *-0° 

; \A .*afe- ^ .TSfifes;. 



^ v «, 
> ^ <A * ‘ 

". *««? •£ 


- ** <& ^ - - ~ - 
• •»* A <v *'..** A '•.»* A 

<Jy c, o " 0 * q ’ . 1 ' 9 •» <3 A& c 0 " 0 -» ^ 

\n % ^xNMn^^ ^ * J&(\l//ys2> -p <N '» * 

'’b^ +*<$ 



o 

j'Tsinww »° ^ '*' 

O AW^* o ^ «> 

090 a 0 ^ 9 * 1 *y 

/* c\ aP *> v '!/<i> '<? 

• %, / .’aW' « a - *■ 

*" \Py • 


cl ^ °vP ° 

* ° 
> <L V 


- ^ ^ 
* ^ 0 


' ■ M V '%,-■ 

cfi o 1 1 6 + ^o 

(r * o j"fr 

a* t. ^ * &(\I//ys2-> -p \n 

* ^o« 't§Mr^* ^ 

/ \-^^* / v^^‘f°’ % 

.<) , * •», *> v »**pL% c\ ,0 »’*°- 

• <i^ "(AmA'o ^ ^ <£ * 

- ^ V vV 

.* ^ v % • 

, mr _. , <la c£* * 4 . ^ <> -» ^ 

\* 'V. s s ' 0 • , ' , <V -- , 

<£, 0 w « ^ <$> . *• # * * O V^ o ° H ° + ^Av .0 

'V * <" ^ Ci *» O j^> • ^ vv 0 

r *7. , ^ * Jf//>Z?2L , \N % ^SxVUn'^K^ ^ 

W* ^> 4 N a K\\I///S ^~ *>* 4^ O /Tv^v ^jJl^ ft «* T» ^ 

« ^ Q • CJ N vW^q^:" . ^ Cl 



s • • 


?_ * o „ o 0 ,0° 

•'U 'b* 


JJf& * f 
-•* 




4 O^ 


y • o 


-^••^•/ -o 

a0 v 9 ’*°' ^ + 


O • A 


A 



<N 

vx_ A 
o V 


^ MWVOs" ’ ' < ^. 

v* * < -A ) ^ * p. 0 

% *° 90 a 0 

-^ v /o'. A *> f /o'. 

* ^ a s ^ ’w^- '/' ^ '-%*$?.' a 5 ^ 

v <V s' 0 V O '0.0 A <v "o. s' G V O 

A 0 ° W C *P ^ 0^ o 1 * 8 + O \^ G° WC, P ^ 0 V 0 t 1 B ^ Q 

1^ ♦ _c^C\ . ^ C V *’j&({f77?^ ° C ^ — /K^ -r o ^ 

. AV • •''• -• ’\</ ^'*•■•’■ A® 1 ^ \ f 0° 

,, ,0~ •■•,;•. •> V ,'i.^-.. «V .0 > V s ,^1/. C\ ,0~ •••".. 

<A ♦ A ^ A .c^ 

V» <. ''7*^T'' G^ ^ ’'o..- 4 A' ^ ‘'O.o 4 ^<*. ''♦oo*' 

0*0* <£ p, V 0 t • * ^ A^ c o N G + <£ • c ' • ^ ^O 4 V 0 0 w ° ^ ^ 

<- ^ Cr O a!*^ • .<** ^ rV v^/r^, -r o ^ ^ 

% < IA ^ /- 

o AX % " Al. q< 

4 o. 

N -a? ^ 

► r 





4 

• '* Jp' °^ *»*o° ^cr ^ ^ #1# °? 

• ^ ^0' ^ # c ?- > %»VL% c\ <0^ A*o. "> V AV*% 

• ^ ♦ AwA° 0 A$. A°o ^ Jr ♦ • 

%v > ^ v vrv 

4* rx v I/// v WV \w* * •* «> Av o < t///%‘Av\V * aV^ -. ° #-^> ^o, o 

^ oVj^* ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ’^8^* ^ ^ ° 

*■ A <, <- '..s' G r o '“.A A <r, "'..s' A '•'.*• 

- o j u- • 0 V *"^ ‘ ^ 

•-•° f °° ^ 0c V^«>«^* 0° ^ ‘* 9 ' 1 *'\v ?> °°^ ^ = ^0° ^ 

<o p Y • o-. > v A s!_vi'^ ^ a 0 ^*°- y> % lv% o. .<y -»• 

"-S % .*i®k: W : Mm'- -M^°, \<* ' 

^•v : .li».* 



v^ 




'p. A -» 

•„ ^ ^ ; 

.* : -^!* : /\ °WIP. : /\ , 

. v - 'o.„* A <. "•'.. s' G v A <*■. ■'' .. s 

0^ • w # 5 A, O A^ G ° W C ♦ ^>v 0^ 9 V 1 9 ^ O A^ G 0 N 0 4 <£ 

• , bv + • , *'-o < :. 

4 


4 

s <y ^ 

vr~S .K o '-'•'XiS> 3 :-' 0 

•’• y <V '•■•’ A° 

V s'Vj. ^ a0 






%> 9 . , s • A* 

y ® o . ^ *x. < . v 


v V A> * 

• °* -^ 0 /o\ A . v 0, 

• »rC<\M A'o <y " J 


N 0 


^ v% * ^tyy/ vdr^ C 

A "V A^f,* o.^ 
a° A • - 1 A 

y . ’ • o, <> x> s 



V - Wjaxv ,. S 

^ . e^r* ^ «* *y 'V _- 

°w '°*‘ < x^ <> * ; A' % A O '°.A A <. '' 

9 ■» o y^ o ° 9 ° * o v . i *», "^o _A c ° 9 ° 

r ° A ^ c ° A 

■^O t> 


» *^> A 

o *>* -V 



^ 7. . 

“ ‘ • >STJ • ^0 V __ 

'°* Jy° ^ yl °*t> ‘'^^’° X° ^ 

A 0 >$> •'' A V ^ o « 0 A 0 <$> 

o v ^ • o* a> v % % lvi/ 4. *<y 



S vi * 

- <y ^ 

A° A '« 

% ^ C° *WfeA ^ sj^ 


^ <*> 


• A 





<*. "-/As' G v o 'o.. 9 A <v s' G^ 

. (A > • »• 1 8 * O A^" G ° N ° ^ t ^>v 0*^ 

■<P (^ t /K>2o -v O •"» - ^.cvTs^ *. /-V t 

^ •T' ^ ^ ^ 






« 'r 



* *TVT»' o,A l °o *.0° ^ **<’*’ O' 9*, * 0 » 0 ° a 0 ^ '^ \ 

► ‘l* +* a a S Stitob . \ ,a* *'^i/tir 0 U & -'&&• ^ ^ 

° 0^ * a V v V : ll||§f 0 0 s ^ ^ v * J *lli8f< 0 ^ ^ °c 



*°<* 




♦/77i % \6* v o, 14 0 <> '••* 

_A t ' s * ^o 6 o " o „ <S> 

<? ° y ‘‘^sstok* %. c 

K K\UMy> ** A> * *P> A 


A 


<y «<* * 



O v 



0 0 ^ 

y v^V V-^v. 

- ♦ 9f> -V /<5 ^'. ~ - V 




0*1 


: A' % \ 

v v' -> > <L 

^ «■ • v , Vjr C° / 

• ^ <0 o/ W" +Mr* 



A r, 0 " 0 


o v 




. „ „ / 4? %> • 

'• • * * A <* * 

b jA o °y° ♦ 

O <T> _jJ^v ' *P_ 


Jy° ^ 




V^'/ V‘-v ^ 

% % A*° *, .A ' Si if. ^ <A- * 

* A V *^. : ^llP^ “ ^'V ' VA 

^ a^ *+ -^m&s <,0 ^ ^ ,^ Vs s 



• < -» 
* ^ ^ • 



4 O. 



y aA 

A y 'o. * * ,' 

*^Q <A % 0 0 " 0 -* ^ 

■ ’W : '^fe- -ov^ 

v .. - 0 0 " 0, */° s .. , O< \^^^ 0 °,,.o/% ‘" 1 ‘ 

%/:'$k-S^/ V ^v/ ‘' km V '^ 

* A* ^ ^ % -yjw* A V ^ 



4 V S • • 

V . *lw-* 



9- 

o 

cA ° 

S Sy ^ ° 

e>. ,0^ . l 'S 9-, r.° t 




J <y ^v/i* ,0^ % '••* 

aA % c°" e -9 ^ ,cr t • i y* ♦ °o ,1 




o5 : 

^ °o '* 

yJ^rk.% 4 ? * ^ ^ 





* A* V % 


> ^O , * * y\ <^K ^’ • * ' 

^ . V' .0*0 <$> qV i ^ 

O _ A. - C <vrv. ^ 1*^ i _ /v^2-» -r 

^o V v ^ 0^ 



I? ^ V 


A o° ^ ^ V 


^ **Trr-’* y < o J .'**.v.’ 

v' .'^'. ^ * 



< * O, ^ V t s S # ' 



O v 

£>» X 0 ^ 









